US Politics Thread

[Federberg]

Trump polling neck and neck with Biden and seems a lock for GOP candidate. I can't help thinking this is a wonderful thing for Democrats. The economy keeps going strong, I suspect that even if it starts to tail off next year, people will continue to feel better about things before reality hits. Meanwhile the abortion issue isn't going away, a lot of folks will be put off by Trumps legal problems. I think we'll look back on this period and realise that Trump polling so close (really more about Biden weakness than Trump strength) is the very thing that leads to a Biden blow out win. No one who doesn't want Trump (note how I frame that.. not pro-Biden) will be complacent

 

[Moxie]

Trump polling neck and neck with Biden and seems a lock for GOP candidate. I can't help thinking this is a wonderful thing for Democrats. The economy keeps going strong, I suspect that even if it starts to tail off next year, people will continue to feel better about things before reality hits. Meanwhile the abortion issue isn't going away, a lot of folks will be put off by Trumps legal problems. I think we'll look back on this period and realise that Trump polling so close (really more about Biden weakness than Trump strength) is the very thing that leads to a Biden blow out win. No one who doesn't want Trump (note how I frame that.. not pro-Biden) will be complacent

If Biden weren't 80...say he was "just" 70...he'd be killing in the polls. Obviously, he IS 80, and Trump is 77. As has been noted, the darling of the youth in the last election was Bernie Sanders (81.) Is it like men's tennis of past 2 decades, where there just hadn't been any great young talent (since Obama)? There is a chance that the Republican field will get winnowed down and Trump might find himself battling just one or two for the nomination. I'm not saying this would be good for the Dems...they'd rather run against Trump, I think. But Trump's negatives might prevent him from getting through the primary process.

 

[Moxie]

All post-Covid elections should make their ruling class and medical “experts” explain just exactly how and why they exercised their powers.

Forever? But seriously, I don't think anyone is interested in this on the Presidential electoral level. If they are, questions can be asked. More importantly, IMO, it should be investigated, (and I hope it is being,) at various levels of policy-making. It IS an experience that should be learned from.

And yet you prolly voted for Hillary who bypassed large swathes of the country in her pursuit for what she thought was hers by right?

That's a large assumption to make, that Clinton thought it was hers "by right." By election day, she thought, as did most everyone else, that she was going to win. That's different. Additionally, I'm interested in what you mean by she "bypassed large swathes of the country." Do you mean by states visited, or by amounts of voters reached? It's worth noting that there are several states in the US with more cows than people. There are also more "red" states than "blue" states, but that doesn't talk to the notion of populace reached.

 

[Kieran]

Forever? But seriously, I don't think anyone is interested in this on the Presidential electoral level. If they are, questions can be asked. More importantly, IMO, it should be investigated, (and I hope it is being,) at various levels of policy-making. It IS an experience that should be learned from.

Who said anything about “forever?” I know you’re joking and think it’s a tired topic to bring up during an election cycle, but look at Canada for example: should their president have to explain why he froze peoples bank accounts? This was extreme and should be front and foremost of any election there. In America I’m sure there are plenty of divisions around governmental Covid policies and the possible weaponising of the virus to the benefit of some over others. Every country went through this, most especially having to suffer unelected health officials dominating the news and threatening extremely unscientific measures that made no sense. I could give you examples from Ireland alone: wet pubs and dry pubs. If you look it up and try scan illogic of this one, you’ll laugh, except for the effect it had on people’s livelihoods. There are many issues relating to how politicians and unelected health tzars behaved, and the effect this had on people’s lives.

You might not see the problems Democrats created during this time but I’m sure tribalists on the other side saw them more clearly and prefer them to be discussed.

That's a large assumption to make, that Clinton thought it was hers "by right." By election day, she thought, as did most everyone else, that she was going to win. That's different. Additionally, I'm interested in what you mean by she "bypassed large swathes of the country." Do you mean by states visited, or by amounts of voters reached? It's worth noting that there are several states in the US with more cows than people. There are also more "red" states than "blue" states, but that doesn't talk to the notion of populace reached.

Come on, Hillary was the embodiment of the entitled political creature! She skipped visiting states in the midwest for whatever reason, yet it likely cost her the election. I would tend to agree with you that Trump cares first and foremost about himself, yet he has millions of people who think he was a good president. You’re never going to agree with them, just as they’ll never agree with you and other ballot-monogamous Democrats that Hillary was, or Biden is, the answer, but such is the nature of modern politics, more starkly shown in a two party system…

 

[Moxie]

Who said anything about “forever?” I know you’re joking and think it’s a tired topic to bring up during an election cycle, but look at Canada for example: should their president have to explain why he froze peoples bank accounts? This was extreme and should be front and foremost of any election there. In America I’m sure there are plenty of divisions around governmental Covid policies and the possible weaponising of the virus to the benefit of some over others. Every country went through this, most especially having to suffer unelected health officials dominating the news and threatening extremely unscientific measures that made no sense. I could give you examples from Ireland alone: wet pubs and dry pubs. If you look it up and try scan illogic of this one, you’ll laugh, except for the effect it had on people’s livelihoods. There are many issues relating to how politicians and unelected health tzars behaved, and the effect this had on people’s lives.

You might not see the problems Democrats created during this time but I’m sure tribalists on the other side saw them more clearly and prefer them to be discussed.

Obviously, you want to hear this brought up, but you don't vote here, or in Canada. Now, I said that questions be asked. I don't know what more you want. You can also say that the Dems need to be held accountable, but do remember on who's watch Covid and covid policies began. Now, if it is a Trump v Biden election, well, you'd have the two guys who guarded watch, so they'd be right there to ask.

Come on, Hillary was the embodiment of the entitled political creature! She skipped visiting states in the midwest for whatever reason, yet it likely cost her the election. I would tend to agree with you that Trump cares first and foremost about himself, yet he has millions of people who think he was a good president. You’re never going to agree with them, just as they’ll never agree with you and other ballot-monogamous Democrats that Hillary was, or Biden is, the answer, but such is the nature of modern politics, more starkly shown in a two party system…

Hillary skipped some states, as did Trump. (Hate to tell you, but basically no one goes to Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming or Idaho.) She skipped a few more, but there are more (many less-populous) states that are solidly Republican. It wasn't the Mid-West she skipped. She's a Mid Westerner, you likely forgot. Look, the way our systems stands, at present, the Presidency is won in the electoral college, not by popular vote. Hillary did win the popular vote, meaning that her message reached more voters in a positive way. As to what Hillary skipped, and what often gets skipped, here is what I found:

After their nominations in 2012, Obama and Romney visited 8 and 10 states, respectively. That's in about the last 3-4 months before the election. In the last 7 days before election day in 2016, Clinton went to 8 states, Trump to 12. They went to the same main battleground states, and Trump added a few likely Republican ones that he wanted to shore up. I don't understand why you're pulling out Clinton as "skipping" in any special way great swathes of the electorate. Other than that you obviously don't like her.

 

[Kieran]

Obviously, you want to hear this brought up, but you don't vote here, or in Canada.

Well spotted. Totally irrelevant, by the way, but well spotted. I said that ‘all post-Covid elections should make their ruling class and medical “experts” explain just exactly how and why they exercised their powers.‘ That includes your country and mine.

Now, I said that questions be asked. I don't know what more you want. You can also say that the Dems need to be held accountable, but do remember on whose watch Covid and covid policies began. Now, if it is a Trump v Biden election, well, you'd have the two guys who guarded watch, so they'd be right there to ask.

Of course. Trump and Biden should be grilled on their response to the pandemic. There should also be independent inquiries into the activities of unelected health honchos like Fauci in your country, and Tony O’Halloran in my country. So many questions not only ‘can’ be asked - as you put it, as if it’s simply a matter of exercising an option if you prefer to - but must be asked.

Hillary skipped some states, as did Trump. (Hate to tell you, but basically no one goes to Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming or Idaho.) She skipped a few more, but there are more (many less-populous) states that are solidly Republican. It wasn't the Mid-West she skipped. She's a Mid Westerner, you likely forgot. Look, the way our systems stands, at present, the Presidency is won in the electoral college, not by popular vote.

That’s right, though there were Democrats who wanted to pressure the electoral college into betraying their function.

After their nominations in 2012, Obama and Romney visited 8 and 10 states, respectively. That's in about the last 3-4 months before the election. In the last 7 days before election day in 2016, Clinton went to 8 states, Trump to 12. They went to the same main battleground states, and Trump added a few likely Republican ones that he wanted to shore up. I don't understand why you're pulling out Clinton as "skipping" in any special way great swathes of the electorate. Other than that you obviously don't like her.

Well I could probably like her if she was likeable. You like her simply because she’s a Democrat. But in terms of skipping parts of the country, I suppose it would never be mentioned if it didn’t become a discussion point after the election. Remember, we’re discussing here who doesn’t care about the public. Hillary is the charmer who dismissed half of Trump supporters as being a ‘basket of deplorables,’ racist, sexist, homophobe etc.

That’s quite a large swathe of the country..

 

[Moxie]

Well spotted. Totally irrelevant, by the way, but well spotted. I said that ‘all post-Covid elections should make their ruling class and medical “experts” explain just exactly how and why they exercised their powers.‘ That includes your country and mine.



Of course. Trump and Biden should be grilled on their response to the pandemic. There should also be independent inquiries into the activities of unelected health honchos like Fauci in your country, and Tony O’Halloran in my country. So many questions not only ‘can’ be asked - as you put it, as if it’s simply a matter of exercising an option if you prefer to - but must be asked.

It's what you want. Well, you've made your point here on TF. Hopefully that gets heard.

That’s right, though there were Democrats who wanted to pressure the electoral college into betraying their function.

I think you have your parties mixed up.

Well I could probably like her if she was likeable. You like her simply because she’s a Democrat. But in terms of skipping parts of the country, I suppose it would never be mentioned if it didn’t become a discussion point after the election. Remember, we’re discussing here who doesn’t care about the public. Hillary is the charmer who dismissed half of Trump supporters as being a ‘basket of deplorables,’ racist, sexist, homophobe etc.

That’s quite a large swathe of the country..

Please don't tell me how much I like (or don't) Hillary Clinton, or why. I don't recall you ever asking me if I liked her. I've defended her around here, from a lot of bile. Anyway, I'm a bit tired of your scolding me about how I vote and why. But it doesn't change the fact that Hillary Clinton didn't really skip "large swathes" of the country.

 

[Kieran]

It's what you want. Well, you've made your point here on TF. Hopefully that gets heard.

Very mature response to a valid discussion point.

I think you have your parties mixed up.

After Trump won the 2016 election, there were Democrats who wanted to pressure the electoral college into changing their votes, no?

Please don't tell me how much I like (or don't) Hillary Clinton, or why. I'm a bit tired of your scolding me about how I vote and why. But it doesn't change the fact that Hillary Clinton didn't really skip "large swathes" of the country.

When you call about 40 million people a basket of deplorables, you’ve bypassed a large swathe of the country. What’s funny about the Democrats is how easy they dismiss their opponents as racist, homophobic etc, but say nothing about the current president who told black people that if they don’t know to vote for him, “they ain’t black.”

That’s racist. But the left gives a pass to racists they like. And misogynists they like, too..

 

[tented]

In some respects, covid has been turned into the epitome of the cliche “hindsight is 20/20” — it’s only now, literally years later in certain instances, that we can look back and realize various decisions were wrong. At the time, however, before we knew everything we now know, people made decisions based on possible outcomes. Anyone who has seen the movie “Contagion” — which was carefully vetted by virologists, public health doctors, etc. — will know how terribly things can go. We also have the 1918-1920 Spanish Flu outbreak as a real life example of how a virus can spread disastrously and kill millions. When covid began, politicians and public health officials didn’t know what they were dealing with, therefore they acted conservatively in order to save lives. Only now can we look back and know certain decisions and actions were unnecessary, if not outright wrong. To blame them in retrospect for certain decisions is inappropriate.

 

[Kieran]

In some respects, covid has been turned into the epitome of the cliche “hindsight is 20/20” — it’s only now, literally years later in certain instances, that we can look back and realize various decisions were wrong. At the time, however, before we knew everything we now know, people made decisions based on possible outcomes. Anyone who has seen the movie “Contagion” — which was carefully vetted by virologists, public health doctors, etc. — will know how terribly things can go. We also have the 1918-1920 Spanish Flu outbreak as a real life example of how a virus can spread disastrously and kill millions. When covid began, politicians and public health officials didn’t know what they were dealing with, therefore they acted conservatively in order to save lives. Only now can we look back and know certain decisions and actions were unnecessary, if not outright wrong. To blame them in retrospect for certain decisions is inappropriate.

Would you apply that also to Trump’s response to the pandemic? I don’t think it’s inappropriate at all to ask hard questions and place blame firmly where it belongs regarding responses to the pandemic, which were at times more about politics than science..

 

[tented]

^ And that post is not to be interpreted as anything tribal. In fact, it has nothing to do with democrats/republicans, because people from both parties were involved in decision making. I’m talking merely from a virology and public health perspective.

 

[Kieran]

^ And that post is not to be interpreted as anything tribal. In fact, it has nothing to do with democrats/republicans, because people from both parties were involved in decision making. I’m talking merely from a virology and public health perspective.

All of this became politicised, brother. Covid became tribal. Or rather, it fell into the usual tribal division..

 

[tented]

All of this became politicised, brother. Covid became tribal. Or rather, it fell into the usual tribal division..

Yes, of course. Every. Fucking. Thing has become tribal.

I’m referring simply to early decisions to have people wear masks, to stay at home, etc. — things I’ve heard people today say so smugly, “We didn’t need masks, that was bullshit.” Well, sure, *now* we know more, but in late 2019/early 2020 we did not know.

 

[Kieran]

Yes, of course. Every. Fucking. Thing has become tribal.

I’m referring simply to early decisions to have people wear masks, to stay at home, etc. — things I’ve heard people today say so smugly, “We didn’t need masks, that was bullshit.” Well, sure, *now* we know more, but in late 2019/early 2020 we did not know.

Without derailing the thread because this has all been beaten up on the covid thread, I think it didn’t matter what we knew or didn’t know. Politics decided it. There were scientists silenced so a political manoeuvre could happen. By the way, something had to happen, right? The questions to be answered are, how were decisions reached, and why?

 

[tented]

Without derailing the thread because this has all been beaten up on the covid thread, I think it didn’t matter what we knew or didn’t know. Politics decided it. There were scientists silenced so a political manoeuvre could happen. By the way, something had to happen, right? The questions to be answered are, how were decisions reached, and why?

Of course it mattered what we knew or didn’t know. It wasn’t known in late 2019 if we were dealing with the next Ebola, so decisions were implemented which had been made years ago in the possibility that something as infectious as Ebola were to become a global pandemic.

 

[Kieran]

Of course it mattered what we knew or didn’t know. It wasn’t known in late 2019 if we were dealing with the next Ebola, so decisions were implemented which had been made years ago in the possibility that something as infectious as Ebola were to become a global pandemic.

Yes but it soon became apparent this wasn’t Ebola. The pandemic responses once that was known were varied, from the Swedish one, which has largely been vindicated, to extremely authoritarian ones like Canada and Austria, which have not been vindicated. Trump, Biden, everyone.

Remember, the point I made in response to others is that all countries holding elections must discuss this, ask questions and hold people accountable for their policies. It was the biggest global event in years and it affected everyone. If bad politics was at play, that’s important to know..

 

[Federberg]

In some respects, covid has been turned into the epitome of the cliche “hindsight is 20/20” — it’s only now, literally years later in certain instances, that we can look back and realize various decisions were wrong. At the time, however, before we knew everything we now know, people made decisions based on possible outcomes. Anyone who has seen the movie “Contagion” — which was carefully vetted by virologists, public health doctors, etc. — will know how terribly things can go. We also have the 1918-1920 Spanish Flu outbreak as a real life example of how a virus can spread disastrously and kill millions. When covid began, politicians and public health officials didn’t know what they were dealing with, therefore they acted conservatively in order to save lives. Only now can we look back and know certain decisions and actions were unnecessary, if not outright wrong. To blame them in retrospect for certain decisions is inappropriate.

I loved that movie - Contagion. Ironically I watched it only a few months before the pandemic started.

I thought the initial steps taken, by government, were appropriate. First jabs etc. Not so much which subsequent booster jabs. Now it just seems like a money grab to me.

But... and this is something that governments all over the world are guilty of... it dismays me that no one looked at what other countries were doing and tried to learn from that. At least they weren't doing it enough. Sweden was a beautiful control case for most Western governments. Meanwhile all of Africa was woefully undervaxxed and no catastrophe happened there. On the other hand Brazil was also undervaxxed and huge fatalities occurred there. Why? We need an explanation. They should have been working on trying to understand why as it was happening. I don't believe we yet know. At a certain point it became clear that many precautions were clearly unnecessary, like wearing masks outdoors. But no clear communicated guidelines were given. It's tragic because I believe a lot of the reason for the incompetence was politically motivated. I blame Trump more than any single individual for this, but he's not alone. I fear for us in a future pandemic. If that one is more deadly we as a species are in serious serious trouble. This isn't about politics, but it has to be said that some on the right were reckless but similarly on the left some went completely overboard trying to cancel people. Somewhere in the middle would have been right. Why are we so fucking childish in this era??

 

[tented]

I loved that movie - Contagion. Ironically I watched it only a few months before the pandemic started.

That’s funny — I watched it again less than two weeks before covid first made news, which is why it has stayed with me so closely ever since.

I thought the initial steps taken, by government, were appropriate. First jabs etc. Not so much which subsequent booster jabs. Now it just seems like a money grab to me.

Absolutely. What began as a public health issue based on a virus became about politics and money.

But... and this is something that governments all over the world are guilty of... it dismays me that no one looked at what other countries were doing and tried to learn from that. At least they weren't doing it enough. Sweden was a beautiful control case for most Western governments. Meanwhile all of Africa was woefully undervaxxed and no catastrophe happened there. On the other hand Brazil was also undervaxxed and huge fatalities occurred there. Why? We need an explanation. They should have been working on trying to understand why as it was happening. I don't believe we yet know. At a certain point it became clear that many precautions were clearly unnecessary, like wearing masks outdoors. But no clear communicated guidelines were given. It's tragic because I believe a lot of the reason for the incompetence was politically motivated. I blame Trump more than any single individual for this, but he's not alone. I fear for us in a future pandemic. If that one is for deadly we as a species are in serious serious trouble. This isn't about politics, but it has to be said that some on the right were reckless but similarly on the left some went completely overboard trying to cancel people. Somewhere in the middle would have been right. Why are we so fucking childish in this era??

This is a perfect assessment of what happened. Well done.

 

[tented]

Yes but it soon became apparent this wasn’t Ebola. The pandemic responses once that was known were varied, from the Swedish one, which has largely been vindicated, to extremely authoritarian ones like Canada and Austria, which have not been vindicated. Trump, Biden, everyone.

Remember, the point I made in response to others is that all countries holding elections must discuss this, ask questions and hold people accountable for their policies. It was the biggest global event in years and it affected everyone. If bad politics was at play, that’s important to know..

Yes of course these issues need to be discussed. My point is simply that when discussed, the issues are treated appropriately. Which I know will never happen…

Ideally, actions taken and decisions made during a pandemic should be coming largely from public health experts, virologists, etc. Leaving medical decisions in the hands of politicians is sure to be folly. But I also know this isn’t going to happen either. What’s best for people rarely happens. This is why I mentioned the film Contagion. I don’t think the words “Democrat”, “Republican”, “Left”, or “Right” are ever used. It’s about implementing plans which had already been developed should such an outbreak occur.

 

[Kieran]

Yes of course these issues need to be discussed. My point is simply that when discussed, the issues are treated appropriately. Which I know will never happen…

Ideally, actions taken and decisions made during a pandemic should be coming largely from public health experts, virologists, etc. Leaving medical decisions in the hands of politicians is sure to be folly. But I also know this isn’t going to happen either. What’s best for people rarely happens. This is why I mentioned the film Contagion. I don’t think the words “Democrat”, “Republican”, “Left”, or “Right” are ever used. It’s about implementing plans which had already been developed should such an outbreak occur.

Your lips to Gods Ear, brother. The unfortunate thing is that science itself has aligned itself tribally. I doubt that any of this will be openly discussed during any election cycles..